Is This Not Who We Are?

You can dismiss conservative voters all you want, but give them this: They’re every bit as Canadian as any idealized vision of the place.

The January issue of the Atlantic is dedicated to articles exploring what a second Trump presidency in the US would look like. Most of it is written as you would imagine.

But the centerpiece of the whole issue, the article that’s getting the most attention by far, is Mark Leibovich’s writing about Trump voters being America too. Mark pulls out the phrase often heard, written, and implied in the media, “This is not who we are.” Whether it’s said as a hope, a wish, or a scold, the media imagines the better angels of America’s nature will swoop down from the architecture and be born again – a pleasant and prosperous nation in a non-Trumpian peaceful world.

In the last election 74 million Americans voted Republican. They are neighbours, friends, co-workers, employees, and family of the 81 million Americans who voted Democrat. They all love their friends, their home, and their family, and America too. By focusing on Mr. Trump and insisting ‘that’s not who we are’ the opportunity for understanding is lost. The same writers who rail against the stupidity of co-opting the world Woke, are all too comfortable with doing the same using Trump to box in tens of millions of ideas and points of view. Insisting on a Trump-mania blocks any possibility of understanding what is happening in America. Mr. Trump like every politician before him is a symbol, however tarnished, bitter, and broken, of the values, hopes, worries, and dreams of millions. However unlikely it may seem to many in the media, Mr. Trump is a symbol of reverence for the old-time qualities of duty, loyalty, and discipline.

Telling 74 million people, the number of Republican votes in the last election, who believe this to buck up and be better than that is no more likely to work than telling any one person:

You never…

You always…

Yes, but…

You should be more like…

You’re overreacting…

Calm down…

Here’s a rule of thumb. If it won’t work on your partner, it won’t work on 74 million people who think about something a little differently from you.

In marriage, we learn to respectfully acknowledge the other’s perspectives, try to articulate the other’s position, ask for help in understanding why it’s important, and give what support we can. There are still disagreements. But this process sure takes the edge off compared to the “this is not who we are” admonishment that literally denies the other’s personhood, agency, and free will.

A Crown is Just a Hat that Lets the Rain In

When I was younger I accepted the notion, the label, that I had a problem with authority. I’m not the only one. This Rebel Without A Cause teenage trope is pinned as a label to undermine almost any young person who speaks out. Many accept it and wear it as a badge of honour. If this is your experience, I’d like to ask you to open yourself up to the idea that this is wrong. It’s not authority youth rebels against. It is the misuse of power in all the varied forms it takes.

Power is an ephemeral and ethereal thing even when it can be heavy-handed and brutal. If you are wondering who has the power in this mixed-up world here’s a simple test: Who would you be afraid to speak out against? Who could destroy your life with a word? Who controls your speech and the things you can joke about? When would you remain silent in a crowd even if your conscience told you to speak? That’s who has the power.

Some things are for sure. It’s not the democratic majority. It’s not the institutions, structures, and certainties of the past. It’s not the police or the bosses. It’s not the politicians, church, or business leaders. It’s not our parents or teachers. It’s not our wedding vows or science. And it sure as heck isn’t Pierre Poilievre and the Conservative Party of Canada.

What Have We Learned Here Canada?

As Canada is about to take one of its most epic leaps toward the Conservative in electoral history, it’s worth considering the American experience. There are only a few times in Canadian history that a party has lost or won 100 seats in a single election. Unless something dramatic changes, it’s likely to happen in the next election.

The last time this happened was in 1984 when Pierre Trudeau’s Liberal government lost 107 seats. Election articles online would say Brian Mulroney’s Conservatives won the most seats in Canadian election history in 1984—211 (75%) of the seats. I think a better understanding is that Mr. Trudeau lost the most seats in election history. There was no ‘Mulroney Mania’.

Likewise, with what’s about to happen in the next election. Projections have the Conservatives on track to win up to 225 (of 338) seats! Or rather Mr. J. Trudeau’s Liberals and the rest losing this many seats. As before, it’s not a cult of personality in leadership. There is no Pierre Poilievre-mania. There’s also no point and nothing to gain in influence or understanding by saying ‘that’s not who we are’ when millions of Canadians, of mind and manner as diverse as the new country itself, get up, go out, and vote their conscience, and say that is exactly who they are.

The history of the Western world is the story of a long erratic and unlikely but amazing march toward liberalism and peace. For more than half a century Canada has been at the head of the column – the cutting edge of creative thinking about what democratic liberal nations can be. But progress doesn’t happen in a straight line. It’s our responsibility to recognize when, in our zeal for new freedoms, we begin to behave in revolt against restraint of any kind. I did name this blog All Lines Are Curves. There is no infinite good. Everything suffers from entropy and diminishing returns. That’s what I believe is happening. It is a tendency on the part of a few to drift into a lack of reverence for the old-time qualities of duty, loyalty, and discipline. The human animal, like so many in the animal world, is a collective species no matter what our individualistic minds imagine. The new idea that all hierarchies are tyrannical hierarchies is unsustainable in human society.

Following the trend of the times, when many who are unable to build shacks are tearing down cathedrals, hurling epithets, attacking policies, ridiculing methods, and generally weakening the lawful authority and lessening respect, there are those in and out of politics who have a sense that we need to slow down, retrieve something of what’s been lost - maybe go back and find another road to the place we all want to go.